I only understood it after reading some of co_king_5’s other comments. This is Poe’s law in action. I know several people who converted into AI coding cultists and they say the same things but seriously. Curiously none of them were coders before AI.
That means.. this benchmark is just saying o3 can write code faster than must humans (in a very time-limited contest, like 2 hours for 6 tasks). Beauty, readability or creativity is not rated. It’s essentially a "how fast can you make the unit tests pass" kind of competition.
"an ability previously thought to be unique to humans".
This sentence.
I’ve read and heard it so many times now, that according to Bayesian statistics, I should correct my assumptions and assume that, in the end, we will find out that there is not a single thing that’s unique to humans.
They do, AFAIK creators get much more money from Premium viewers than ad-supported viewers. And not just relatively, sometimes in absolute numbers as well.
The English explanations you find first for emergent are not really fitting here. Interestingly the Germany explanation for the same word seems to be much better.
I'm pretty sure they mean emergent as in emergent gameplay.
Here's a good explanation for that:
> Emergent gameplay refers to complex situations in video games, board games, or table top role-playing games that emerge from the interaction of relatively simple game mechanics.
So emergent is not inherently surprising. Games like Dwarf Fortress or Rimworld have a lot of emergent complexity but most of it was not surprising.
So in the context of LLM it means that complex reasoning is emergent based on simple underlying mechanics.
And since we thought humans’ complex reasoning skills were very unique.. We are surprised by the emergence of it in LLMs.
PS: The explanation for "emergence" is much better:
> In philosophy, systems theory, science, and art, emergence occurs when a complex entity has properties or behaviors that its parts do not have on their own, and emerge only when they interact in a wider whole.
> Null MX does nothing to prevent spoofing. It is just to signal to mail senders that your domain does not receive email.
And I also found multiple other sources that specify that the null record only announces that the domain does not receive email. After some googling I didn't find a single source that shares your explanation.
Of course it's a security issue, because having neither SPF nor DKIM means that malicious actors can all too easily impersonate your email addresses and phish users with an email that apparently came from your domain.
ChatGPT is not good when it needs to answer directly. If you let it lead itself to the right answer it's pretty good.
# Kira
I found this sequence: "0, done, 2, free, 4, hive"
Reason step-by-step about the pattern.
Consecutively continue the sequence with four more entries.
Consecutively reflect on your answer and fix mistakes in case you broke the pattern.
# ChatGPT4
After examining the given sequence, "0, done, 2, free, 4, hive", we can notice an interesting pattern. It appears that the sequence alternates between numbers and words that sound like numbers. Let's break down the pattern:
"0" is a number.
"done" sounds like the number "1" when spoken aloud.
"2" is a number.
"free" sounds like the number "3" when spoken aloud.
"4" is a number.
"hive" sounds like the number "5" when spoken aloud.
Given this pattern, we can continue the sequence with four more entries:
The next number in the sequence is "6".
The word that sounds like the number "7" is "heaven".
The next number in the sequence is "8".
The word that sounds like the number "9" is "nein", which is German for "no".
So, the continued sequence would be: "0, done, 2, free, 4, hive, 6, heaven, 8, nein".
Reflecting on the pattern and the answer provided, the continuation seems to be consistent with the established pattern. We alternated between numbers and words that phonetically resemble numbers, resulting in the sequence "6, heaven, 8, nein" for the next four entries.